The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Game over?

Page 22 of 25 Previous  1 ... 12 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Mirage on 31.03.14 11:26

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
Poe wrote:
If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.

However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.

If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities...The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins
Great post, totally agree, no government could trust those two to keep their gobs shut about anything.
I am wondering if people may be forgetting that there was something so serious surrounding this case that, within less than 72 hours of the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom ordered the Director of his 40-strong Media Monitoring Unit, Clarence Mitchell, to deal with public relations for the McCanns - and that, 7 years later, he is still in that role and is now a Parliamentary candidate for the ruling political party (Conservative)?

Are we losing sight of the facts that this man:

* boasted that his job was, quote, 'to control what comes out in the media'?

* spoke almost daily to his numerous media and press contacts throughout 2007 & 2008 and much of 2009?

* as soon as he ceased to work for the McCanns full-time, was employed directly by Rupert Murdoch's son-in-law?

* was later employed by Britain's current Prime Minister and ex-NOTW boss Andy Coulson as Deputy Director of Communications for the Conservative Party to help them win the 2010 General Election?

To that we need to add that Rupert Murdoch's CEO, Rebekah Brooks, forced the British Prime Minister to set up the £8 million-and-rising Operation Grange.

Might we also be forgetting the people who are benefitting in one way or another from the Madeleine McCann mystery?

* Rupert Murdoch's press and media empire?

* the innemerable media and press that have made millions by featuring the latest twists and turns in the mystery?

* those behind the 'Hacked Off' campaign who want to end freedom of the press? 

* organisations for msiing and abducted people like 'Missing People' and 'Amber Alert' which have profited hugely from coverage of Madeleine's abduction?

Could we also be losing sight of:

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls with Dr Gerald McCann on his mobile 'phone in May 2007?

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls in May 2007 begging the Portuguese authorities to release the description of 'Tannerman'?

* Gordon Brown's visits to the FSS in Birmingham Leicestershire Constabulary (September 2007)?

* Gordon Brown being 'phoned about Dr Goncalo Amaral's removal from his post even before Amaral himself was informed?

* Gordon Brown's conversations with Jose Socrates, Portuguese Prime Minister, in October 2007 about Madeleine McCann?

* The Home Office's obstruction of the Rogatory Letters?

* Leicestershire Police's delay of nearly 6 months in forwarding the statements of Drs Katarina and Arul Gaspar to the Portuguese Police? 


Many people continue to benefit from and have an interest in the maintenance of the 'Madeleine McCann Mystery'

And it is this extraordinary list of connections that elevates this case to a matter of national concern for those able to perceive the implications for the health of our future society. Because, at the moment, it is very sick indeed. I've said it before but it bears repeating: I glean the impression that the forum members here are of a certain age. It is up to younger people to take some responsibility in these matters otherwise they will wake up one morning and find the last nuts and bolts of dystopia have slid across and there are no exit points. To be clear, there are some off the scale evil people who are highly organised and in positions of influence and power, all co-operating with one another and silently sliding in the final pieces of a bespoke environment'.

____________________
Kate McCann: "It's too 'ot. Give 'im a minute."

Mirage

Posts : 1665
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Woofer on 31.03.14 11:39

Châtelaine wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5. 
***
You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
 big grin 

ETA not that I am against a theory that Diana, princess of Wales was wooshed out of a "situation"

No I`m not actually - its the theory I`ve found most plausible, taking into account that Charlie boy and his wiffey voiced their support for the Mcs - most unusual IMO.  I first read it here `Gerry`s Tunnel Vision` :-

http://truthformadeleine.com/2012/01/gerrys-tunnel-vision/

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Woofer on 31.03.14 11:44

@Bishop Brennan wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5. 
***
You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
 big grin 

Indeed he is! Most amusing post really. Serves as a useful reminder too showing how easy it is for informed speculation to veer off into the absurd. Of course as the recent textusa article tells us, sometimes it's hard to distinguish between woofer's irony and another poster's "stink bomb" (a so-truth-is-not-known diversionary tactic).   thumbsup 

Equally ... and how easy it is for others to label `absurd` and veer discussion away.

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by HelenMeg on 31.03.14 11:45

Re Clarence Mitchell
..............Are the McCanns paying for his services? No. He has been employed by one of their wealthy backers and will continue to work for that person after the Madeleine case is over.
 Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2477770.ece

so who does he work for?

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Cristobell on 31.03.14 11:46

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@AndyB wrote:I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"

Exactly. And who was the first person to contact Gordon Brown and draw his IMMEDIATE attention and intervention? What could it have been about this EXACT group of individuals that drew such immediate and direct intervention? If we knew who PRECISELY set that ball rolling I think the answer to the whole saga would be clear.
All the group had contacts and the term 'six degrees of separation' comes to mind, it probably wasn't that difficult to reach people in government. In addition, the case was high profile from the off, Not only did the McCann media machine establish that Madeleine had been abducted, it also established the fact that everyone supported the parents, so it was a hugely popular bandwagon to jump on, and as we know, many did. A little blonde English girl had been stolen from her bed by a foreigner and the heroes mounted their steeds and charged in without considering the details.  [size=12.727272033691406]The image of a small blonde girl stolen from her bed by a 'dark' stranger is iconic, DW Griffiths used it very successfully in Birth of Nation (1915) to immortalise the image of the 'heroic' Ku Klux Klan.[/size]


[size=12.727272033691406]This imagery is tucked away in the back of all our minds, its a common narrative device that has been used in the arts since time began, the unfortunate Jane Tanner pulled it from the deep recesses of her own memory bank, when she described the abductor (Frankenstein's creature) walking away with a prostrate child across his arms.    [/size]

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by The Rooster on 31.03.14 12:13

Nonetheless if the McCanns were in receipt of sensitive information they could easily be silenced. Why air the dirty laundry in public by re opening the investigation. You don't whitewash for all to see. Discretion is the watchword, this is anything but discreet.

Regarding Gordon Brown, (a poor support act to the worst Prime Minister the country has ever had) he desperately needed to improve his public persona which was very poor, he lacked any sort of charisma and jumped erroneously on to the McCann board game of snakes and ladders hoping for Good Samaritan status. It backfired and the snakes got him. The same thing happened to a number of kindly souls who also wanted to be seen to do good.

The timing and circumstance of the disappearance was perfect and allowed a pupating Gerry McCann to fulfill his ambition for recognition and money. The specter of McCann Fly was born, hideous to most people, ghastly and beloved by Fleet Street. Soaring above his station, wings beating, he conducted (with some help from Mitchell) such a cacophony the sound of which appalled in the extreme. Swat the bastard now... cried the crowd we've had enough! The cry for help was heard by a young David, who with sling shot in hand downed the insect just in time for tea (and an election).

This is pretty much how I see some of the affair, no conspiracy, well intentioned do-gooders, and a very unlucky blue bottle!!!

____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"

The Rooster

Posts : 379
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 70
Location : Virginia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by HelenMeg on 31.03.14 12:19

@The Rooster wrote:Nonetheless if the McCanns were in receipt of sensitive information they could easily be silenced.  Why air the dirty laundry in public by re opening the investigation. You don't whitewash for all to see. Discretion is the watchword, this is anything but discreet.  

Regarding Gordon Brown, (a poor support act to the worst Prime Minister the country has ever had) he desperately needed to improve his public persona which was very poor, he lacked any sort of charisma and jumped erroneously on to the McCann board game of snakes and ladders hoping for Good Samaritan status.  It backfired and the snakes got him.  The same thing happened to a number of kindly souls who also wanted to be seen to do good.

The timing and circumstance of the disappearance was perfect and allowed a pupating Gerry McCann to fulfill his ambition for recognition and money. The specter of McCann Fly was born, hideous to most people,  ghastly and beloved by Fleet Street. Soaring above his station, wings beating, he conducted (with some help from Mitchell) such a cacophony the sound of which appalled in the extreme.  Swat the bastard now... cried the crowd we've had enough!  The cry for help was heard by a young David, who with sling shot in hand downed the insect just in time for tea (and an election).

This is pretty much how I see some of the affair, no conspiracy, well intentioned do-gooders, and a very unlucky blue bottle!!!
Come on young David! Do your stuff - I want to see that ghastly insect downed yes

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Tony Bennett on 31.03.14 12:23

@HelenMeg wrote:Re Clarence Mitchell
....re the McCanns paying for his services? No. He has been employed by one of their wealthy backers and will continue to work for that person after the Madeleine case is over.

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2477770.ece

so who does he work for?
Well, 'who does he (really) work for?' is certainly one question.

Another good question is the one you've raised - who has paid him for all his McCann-related work?

Can anyone point to any one unambiguous quote from anyone which informs the public exactly who is paying him? 

On top of that, there are contradictory statements about who is paying him. The Times quote above conflicts with other stories.

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13971
Reputation : 2146
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Tony Bennett on 31.03.14 12:24

@The Rooster wrote:This is pretty much how I see some of the affair, no conspiracy, well intentioned do-gooders...
Nelsonian

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13971
Reputation : 2146
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by HelenMeg on 31.03.14 12:34

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Re Clarence Mitchell
....re the McCanns paying for his services? No. He has been employed by one of their wealthy backers and will continue to work for that person after the Madeleine case is over.

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2477770.ece

so who does he work for?
Well, 'who does he (really) work for?' is certainly one question.

Another good question is the one you've raised - who has paid him for all his McCann-related work?

Can anyone point to any one unambiguous quote from anyone which informs the public exactly who is paying him? 

On top of that, there are contradictory statements about who is paying him. The Times quote above conflicts with other stories.
Some results from a very brief google search:
 
1.Source MCCANNFILES:
ater he told Sky News that his new job was being paid for by a "generous financial backer who wishes to remain anonymous". He was not receiving money from Mr or Mrs McCann or the Find Madeleine appeal.
 
2. sOURCE http://madeleinefoundation.org.uk/Clarrieleaflet.html

In September 2007, in an unusual move, he resigned from the civil service to become the McCanns’ full-time spokesman, on £75,000 a year. He remains in that role, though he has been employed for the last few months by another major PR agency, Freud Communications.


3.
CLARENCE MITCHELL LIMITED
06517926
Registered Address: Networks House, Whitehall Road, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS12 5JB - established 8/2/2008 - not sure if has anything to do with him..


4. Source : http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10575227.print/
He also works for PR firm Burson-Marsteller, “advising clients over engagement with both the British Government and the Conservative Party”.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Mirage on 31.03.14 12:41

@The Rooster wrote:This is pretty much how I see some of the affair, no conspiracy, well intentioned do-gooders


But, IIRC, didn't Theresa May hold back certain information from an FOI request? And wasn't it on the grounds of national security and damage to diplomatic relations with Portugal?

____________________
Kate McCann: "It's too 'ot. Give 'im a minute."

Mirage

Posts : 1665
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Cristobell on 31.03.14 13:00

@HelenMeg wrote:
@AndyB wrote:I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"
I guess every time Madeleine's face appears on the tabloid cover - it probably increases sales by more than a  hefty amount.

CM is a mystery- he has to be more than he seems.Very useful man, but why? If he were that good / influential he wouldn't be a spokesperson for Mc Canns.  He seems to be full of self-importance yet to me he always will be simply a buffoon.
He is isn't he?

I have been trying to figure him out for years, lol.  I think in former times he might have been a very successful barra boy in Petticoat Lane, roll up, roll up, maybe a spiv in the War, or Uriah Heep should he have been confined to pen pushing.  

His gift, I think, is his sheer 100% belief in himself.  He seems to have learned very early on that if he spoke with an authoritative voice, people took notice of him, it states 'I'm in charge' and in the case of the McCanns it worked, in that many people probably believed he was still speaking on behalf of the Government, not the McCanns personally.  He elevated both himself and the saintly pair onto a pedestal that kept the riff raff at bay.  He has taken a little bit of knowledge and made it go a very, very, long way. He is not an educated man, he lacks sophistication or any signs of knowledge outside of spin.  He would be a liability in a serious debate, and it is interesting to note he has made statements to the Press, and has thus far, avoided any question and answer situations, everything ends 'and this is the word of the lord Gerry.  I have no doubt it was Gerry who suckered him in - their eyes probably met in one fateful moment when they realised how much money could be made, and Gerry saw in Clarence a good and faithful servant who could see his genius.  

Unfortunately for Clarence, he is always the bridesmaid, never the bride.  He reports the news, he speaks on behalf of those in the public eye. Although he is a character, he is not a character in his own right.  As the prospective candidate for Brighton, he's said very little, something about stray dogs, maybe the litter problem, but nothing substantial, or indeed political.  He doesn't seem to have a cause, or anything he wants to change, and where was he last week with Brighton and gay marriage trending?

I don't subscribe to the Times, so can anyone tell me if Clarence is still on the payroll of Freud Communications now he is tory candidate for Brighton?

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Cristobell on 31.03.14 13:06

@The Rooster wrote:Nonetheless if the McCanns were in receipt of sensitive information they could easily be silenced.  Why air the dirty laundry in public by re opening the investigation. You don't whitewash for all to see. Discretion is the watchword, this is anything but discreet.  

Regarding Gordon Brown, (a poor support act to the worst Prime Minister the country has ever had) he desperately needed to improve his public persona which was very poor, he lacked any sort of charisma and jumped erroneously on to the McCann board game of snakes and ladders hoping for Good Samaritan status.  It backfired and the snakes got him.  The same thing happened to a number of kindly souls who also wanted to be seen to do good.

The timing and circumstance of the disappearance was perfect and allowed a pupating Gerry McCann to fulfill his ambition for recognition and money. The specter of McCann Fly was born, hideous to most people,  ghastly and beloved by Fleet Street. Soaring above his station, wings beating, he conducted (with some help from Mitchell) such a cacophony the sound of which appalled in the extreme.  Swat the bastard now... cried the crowd we've had enough!  The cry for help was heard by a young David, who with sling shot in hand downed the insect just in time for tea (and an election).

This is pretty much how I see some of the affair, no conspiracy, well intentioned do-gooders, and a very unlucky blue bottle!!!
Great post, I too think people were carried along the crest of the McCann wave that hit the country in 2007.  Many may regret it now.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by PeterMac on 31.03.14 13:10

@Cristobell wrote:He reports the news, he speaks on behalf of those in the public eye.

But in this case, he has NEVER said he was speaking on behalf of the McCanns. He has always insisted that he KNEW the facts.
He was said they are innocent, that if Madeleine was dead it was not by their hands, that the Fund was not going to be used for legal fees,and so on.
He has thus placed himself deeper inside any conspiracy which may emerge, and may live to regret that he did not say "On behalf of my clients" or "My clients wish me to say that . . "

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by ProfessorPPlum on 31.03.14 13:22

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
Poe wrote:
If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.

However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.

If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities...The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins
Great post, totally agree, no government could trust those two to keep their gobs shut about anything.
I am wondering if people may be forgetting that there was something so serious surrounding this case that, within less than 72 hours of the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom ordered the Director of his 40-strong Media Monitoring Unit, Clarence Mitchell, to deal with public relations for the McCanns - and that, 7 years later, he is still in that role and is now a Parliamentary candidate for the ruling political party (Conservative)?

Are we losing sight of the facts that this man:

* boasted that his job was, quote, 'to control what comes out in the media'?

* spoke almost daily to his numerous media and press contacts throughout 2007 & 2008 and much of 2009?

* as soon as he ceased to work for the McCanns full-time, was employed directly by Rupert Murdoch's son-in-law?

* was later employed by Britain's current Prime Minister and ex-NOTW boss Andy Coulson as Deputy Director of Communications for the Conservative Party to help them win the 2010 General Election?

To that we need to add that Rupert Murdoch's CEO, Rebekah Brooks, forced the British Prime Minister to set up the £8 million-and-rising Operation Grange.

Might we also be forgetting the people who are benefitting in one way or another from the Madeleine McCann mystery?

* Rupert Murdoch's press and media empire?

* the innemerable media and press that have made millions by featuring the latest twists and turns in the mystery?

* those behind the 'Hacked Off' campaign who want to end freedom of the press? 

* organisations for msiing and abducted people like 'Missing People' and 'Amber Alert' which have profited hugely from coverage of Madeleine's abduction?

Could we also be losing sight of:

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls with Dr Gerald McCann on his mobile 'phone in May 2007?

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls in May 2007 begging the Portuguese authorities to release the description of 'Tannerman'?

* Gordon Brown's visits to the FSS in Birmingham Leicestershire Constabulary (September 2007)?

* Gordon Brown being 'phoned about Dr Goncalo Amaral's removal from his post even before Amaral himself was informed?

* Gordon Brown's conversations with Jose Socrates, Portuguese Prime Minister, in October 2007 about Madeleine McCann?

* The Home Office's obstruction of the Rogatory Letters?

* Leicestershire Police's delay of nearly 6 months in forwarding the statements of Drs Katarina and Arul Gaspar to the Portuguese Police? 


Many people continue to benefit from and have an interest in the maintenance of the 'Madeleine McCann Mystery'

Bit late but I wanted to say "Excellent reminder, Tony" :-)

____________________
The prime suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann cannot be permitted to dictate what can and can't be discussed about the case

ProfessorPPlum

Posts : 411
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by jeanmonroe on 31.03.14 13:31

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Re Clarence Mitchell
....re the McCanns paying for his services? No. He has been employed by one of their wealthy backers and will continue to work for that person after the Madeleine case is over.

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2477770.ece

so who does he work for?
Well, 'who does he (really) work for?' is certainly one question.

Another good question is the one you've raised - who has paid him for all his McCann-related work?

Can anyone point to any one unambiguous quote from anyone which informs the public exactly who is paying him? 

On top of that, there are contradictory statements about who is paying him. The Times quote above conflicts with other stories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone point to any one unambiguous quote from anyone which informs the public exactly who is paying him?
-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/clarence-mitchell-i-am-a-decent-human-being-if-i-can-help-them-i-will-1634738.html

By Cole Morton Sunday 01 March 2009

These days Mitchell gets 40 per cent of his former salary as a retainer from the Find Madeleine Fund.

(at least 28,000.00p pa!)

And i have never heard that this is NOT the case, right NOW!

LOTS of kiddies and OAP's 'donations', to the Madeleine Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned (private fund, controlled by McCann family 'members' including board members K&GM) going straight into CM 'pockets' as a 'retainer'

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by TheTruthWillOut on 31.03.14 13:35

Reading that list by Tony just confuses me. After Mitchell did such a splendid job over almost three years why was this all dragged back up again by the Mcs/Brooks and ultimately the SY review/investigation?

Maybe I'm just too dumb to see it? lol

TheTruthWillOut

Posts : 733
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2011-09-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by tiny on 31.03.14 13:35

Theres no words that can describe this low life

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by aquila on 31.03.14 14:06

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Re Clarence Mitchell
....re the McCanns paying for his services? No. He has been employed by one of their wealthy backers and will continue to work for that person after the Madeleine case is over.

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2477770.ece

so who does he work for?
Well, 'who does he (really) work for?' is certainly one question.

Another good question is the one you've raised - who has paid him for all his McCann-related work?

Can anyone point to any one unambiguous quote from anyone which informs the public exactly who is paying him? 

On top of that, there are contradictory statements about who is paying him. The Times quote above conflicts with other stories.
Then there was the private jet from Sir Philip Green to whisk the McCanns to Rome for their Papal visit.

Snipped from Wiki

In May 2007, after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal, Green donated £250,000 as a monetary reward for any useful public information.[12] He also provided the McCanns with the use of his private jet to allow them to fly to Rome for a Papal visit.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcadia_Group

aquila

Posts : 7953
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by tigger on 31.03.14 14:14

i've always thought the £ 70.000,- Mitchell allegedly got paid to PR the M.canns was a risible amount for someone who'd been in charge of the Media Monitoring Unit and who decided what comes out in the news.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by aquila on 31.03.14 14:16

@tigger wrote:i've always  thought the £ 70.000,-  Mitchell allegedly got paid to PR the M.canns was a risible amount for someone who'd been in charge of the Media Monitoring Unit and who decided what comes out in the news.
Me too tigger. It's a bit of a pittance really.

Perhaps there's a need for a new topic on the forum 'things you'd like to ask Clarence'.

aquila

Posts : 7953
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by jeanmonroe on 31.03.14 14:20

Zelebrities/NOTW ONLY 'pledged' to the (knowingly?) NEVER to be claimed 'reward' (£2.6 MILLION)

John McCann, GM's brother

'"ORDINARY members of the public can  still 'donate' to the McCann 'family' private Madeleine Fund, NOT the 'reward'.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by Casey5 on 31.03.14 14:23

Might be a risible amount to some - an absolute fortune to many, myself included- and it's more than an MP receives.

Casey5

Posts : 321
Reputation : 18
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by j.rob on 31.03.14 14:37

@Bishop Brennan wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5. 
***
You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
 big grin 

Indeed he is! Most amusing post really. Serves as a useful reminder too showing how easy it is for informed speculation to veer off into the absurd. Of course as the recent textusa article tells us, sometimes it's hard to distinguish between woofer's irony and another poster's "stink bomb" (a so-truth-is-not-known diversionary tactic).   thumbsup 
It's not necessarily absurd. I think there probably were some dark forces at play surrounding Diana's death. Why not? Ditto Kelly. The timings are interesting. There is no doubt that the supposed 'abduction' of a little girl in a foreign holiday resort was a band-wagon that a great many people wanted to jump on for all sorts of reasons.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Game over?

Post by ultimaThule on 31.03.14 14:44

It appears to me that the vast majority of those 'all sorts of reasons' had more to do with self-aggrandisement than the fate of the British child who was allegedly 'abducted' from her bed in a foreign holiday resort, jrob.

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 22 of 25 Previous  1 ... 12 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum